[FREE IRAN Project] In The Spirit Of Cyrus The GreatViews expressed here are not necessarily the views & opinions of ActivistChat.com. Comments are unmoderated. Abusive remarks may be deleted. ActivistChat.com retains the rights to all content/IP info in in this forum and may re-post content elsewhere.

US Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice (R) and Israeli Foreign Minister Tzipi Livni hold a press conference at the State Department, in Washington, DC. Rice on Wednesday accused Syria and Iran of inflaming anti-West sentiment and inciting violence for their own purposes during the international row over cartoons of the Prophet Mohammed.(AFP/Andrew Councill)

U.S. Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice (R) and National Security Advisor Stephen Hadley in the Oval Office at the White House in Washington, February 8, 2006. Rice accused Iran and Syria on Wednesday of deliberately stoking Muslim anger in a dispute over cartoons satirizing the Prophet Mohammad that have sparked deadly protests. REUTERS/Jim Young

Last edited by cyrus on Wed Feb 08, 2006 5:23 pm; edited 1 time in total

WASHINGTON (AFP) - US Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice accused Syria and Iran of inflaming anti-West sentiment and inciting violence for their own purposes during the international row over cartoons of the Prophet Mohammed.

Rice said after talks with Israeli Foreign Minister Tzipi Livni that some countries were behaving responsibly in the controversy but "there are governments that have also used this opportunity to incite violence.

"I don't have any doubt that ... Iran and Syria have gone out of their way to inflame sentiments and to use this to their own purposes. And the world ought to call them on it," she said.

"Nothing justifies the violence that has broken out in which many innocent people have been injured," Rice said of the protests that have erupted over publication by Western newspapers of caricatures of Mohammed.

"Nothing justifies the burning of diplomatic facilities or threats to diplomatic facilities around the world. This is a time when everyone should urge calm and should urge that there is an atmosphere of respect and understanding."

Reiterating US support for the freedom of expression, Rice added that the press had to show a sense of responsibility. But she added, "All responsible people ought to say that there is no excuse for violence."

SECRETARY RICE: Good afternoon. I am delighted to welcome Foreign Minister
Tzipi Livni of Israel. We have met on a number of occasions. We actually first
met when neither of us was yet in government, in 2000, and so we've gotten to
know each other over the years and I'm very much looking forward to working
with you in what are clearly challenging times but still hopeful times in the
Middle East.

We've had an extensive discussion of all of the issues on our agenda. We have
talked about the situation in the Palestinian territories, about our continued
desire for a two-state solution, for getting back to progress on the roadmap,
but a recognition that this can only happen if a government of the Palestinian
people accepts the principles on which a two-state solution is based, including
recognition of the right of Israel to exist, dismantlement of terrorist
organization, the importance of the renunciation of violence. It's a simple
fact that if you're going to have a two-state solution you would have to have
those conditions in place. And so we talked about the need for the
international community to remain sound and strong on these issues. I think
that the Foreign Minister has welcomed the statement of the Quartet in London
last week regarding these issues.

We talked also about other regional issues, Syria and Lebanon, about Iran and
the importance of international -- the strength of the international community
in making very clear to the Iranians that they have no alternative course but
to accept the just demands of the international community that any peaceful --
any nuclear -- civil nuclear energy programs would be ones that do not have
proliferation risk, meaning that there would not be enrichment and reprocessing
on Iranian soil, and the importance of Iran taking the message, the very strong
message that the IAEA Board of Governors sent in reporting the Iranian dossier
to the UN Security Council.

We talked also about our bilateral relations and the great strength that Israel
and the United States draw from each other as countries that share common
values as well as many ties of kinship. Thank you very much for being here.

FOREIGN MINISTER LIVNI: Thank you. It is a special visit for me today here
because it is my first visit as a foreign minister, as Israel's Foreign
Minister, and it comes after dramatic events in the world, especially in our
region. And in a way, the world is now at a crossroads and there's a need to
take very important and urgent decisions regarding to in confronting the
Islamic extremist terrorists. And we spoke about the situation in Iran and the
raise of the Hamas in the Palestinian Authority in which a terrorist
organization took power.

We believe that it is now very important and crucial that the international
community and they do believe in the -- in America's values and its ability to
lead the international community in sending a very clear message that terror is
not acceptable and there's a need for the Hamas and Palestinian Authority to
meet the requirements as it was said to renounce terrorism and violence, to
dismantle terrorist infrastructure and terrorist organization, to accept the --
acceptance or the existence of the state of Israel as such, or to accept even
the existence of Jews in the land of Israel -- this is something which is
totally against the Hamas charter, by the way, and of course to adopt the
agreements which was signed between Israel and the Palestinians until now. And
then maybe we have a chance to see a change in the Middle East.

Our feeling is that Israel made very important and painful steps in
implementing the disengagement plan in order to give a chance for both our
people, Israelis and Palestinians, and to enter, maybe, a new road. It was,
from our perspective, a window of -- an open window of opportunity and I hope
that it's not closed. And we depend on the international community unified
message to the Palestinians saying that this is not acceptable unless they will
meet these requirements that were mentioned that were adopted by the Quartet,
by the United Nations, by of course the United States of America and accepted
also by Israel.

So we face challenges and I hope that we can do the right things for our
people. And I do believe, as Secretary Rice said, it's not our first meeting
and I have full confidence in Secretary Rice's leadership and values and it's
needed to help to solve problems in the Middle East.

MODERATOR: First question, Ann Gearan from AP.

QUESTION: Madame Secretary, did you discuss the future of U.S. and other
international aid to a Hamas-led Palestinian Government? Can you update us on
where the U.S. review stands? And does it seem likely to you that in the long
run, really all but the direct U.S. aid to the government -- in other words,
the larger pot of humanitarian aid -- would continue to flow?

And for the Foreign Minister, does Israel have the legal authority to continue
to withhold customs and other remittances from a government after Hamas takes
over?

Thank you.

SECRETARY RICE: Well, Ann, we have discussed this matter, but I think our
position is well known. The review continues of our programs. Let me just say
that we're all in agreement that the current caretaker government should be
supported. Abu Mazen is, after all, still the President of the Palestinian
Authority and we have worked hard with some of the Palestinians' neighbors to
try and find ways to support the near-term needs of this interim government and
we were very gratified that the Israeli Government decided to make, on this
one-month basis, the transfer of tax revenues to help the Palestinian Authority
in this interim phase.

We are going to review all of our programs and we are doing that. Obviously,
this is a changing and evolving situation. The very best outcome would be if
any new Palestinian government, whatever its composition, accepts the
requirements that the international community is putting forward. There simply
has to be a recognition of the state of Israel's right to exist. It simply has
to be. Israel is a member of the United Nations. It cannot be that you have a
government that does not accept even its right to exist that then says that it
wants the international community's support for its programs.

Obviously, there are commitments that are already in place. We would expect
those to be accepted. So that would be the very best outcome. We are reviewing
our aid. We are mindful of the humanitarian needs of the Palestinian people.
But I do want to make clear that there are two phases here. We are continuing
to support the caretaker government. The international community has undertaken
to do that. But we await the outcomes of the government formation process
because that will tell the tale of what is possible.

FOREIGN MINISTER LIVNI: If I can answer, the Israeli Government decision to
transfer the money is based on this interim period of time in which even though
we are after the elections in the Palestinian Authority, a new government is
not established -- formed yet. But yet it is important to understand that on
the legal point of view, I can -- I am also the Israeli Minister of Justice --
it is important to understand that this money comes from or is based on
agreements that was signed between Israel and the Palestinians.

Now we are talking about Hamas, which is a designated terrorist organization,
who's going to lead the Palestinians. And so if -- I think that these -- it's
something unacceptable to demand Israel to implement its role in these
agreements while the other side doesn't even agree that we have the right to
live, simple as that. So this is also the legal basis. And more than that,
there is -- there are legal international conventions and it is totally
forbidden under the Israeli law to transfer money to -- that can use to
terrorism. This is part of the global international role against terrorism and
Israel accepted it.

So the situation that we can find ourself, if they will not meet these
requirements in the future, is that this money will go to finance terror
against our citizens. So I believe that not only legally, but even morally,
this is something that Israel will have to rethink in the future. When we
passed -- we transferred the money, we stated that we are doing it based on the
interim period of time and we will judge the situation on a monthly basis in
the future.

QUESTION: Madame Secretary, Israel Acting Prime Minister Ehud Olmert said he
want to set the permanent borders of Israel and the U.S. position is well known
about such unilateral acts by Israel. Are you considered to revise your
position or modify it right now that, on the other side, there is actually no
partner for Israel to deal with?

SECRETARY RICE: Well, first of all, we certainly hope that over the next period
of time that there will be a partner for Israel to deal with. That is
everyone's hope for the roadmap. That depends on what happens in the
Palestinian territories. The United States position on this is very clear and
remains the same. No one should try and unilaterally predetermine the outcome
of a final status agreement. That's to be done at final status. The President
did say that at the time of final status, it will be necessary to take into
account new realities on the ground that have changed since 1967, but under no
circumstances should those realities be -- should anyone try and do that in a
preemptive or predetermined way, because these are issues for negotiation at
final status.

But let me put the whole thing into context. We've been through a tumultuous
period over the last several months in the relationship between Israel and the
Palestinians, but I just want to underscore something that the Foreign Minister
said. Israel withdrew from Gaza and has just gone through a painful withdrawal
as well from a number of settlements in the West Bank. I think everyone was --
has remarked at the way that this democracy has gone through this and gone
through it in a largely peaceful way, although it is obviously a painful
episode.

And this did open an opportunity for peace, for a new kind of peace. We saw, in
the Gaza, the beginning of coming to life of economic life there. We
successfully got a Rafah crossing agreement.

All of this is still possible. The Palestinian people have been through an
election. They voted for change, but I don't think they voted to change their
aspirations for a peaceful life. And the only way that a peaceful life can be
delivered is if there is a two-state solution and that two-state solution has
to begin from the premise that both Palestinians and Israelis have a right to
exist.

MODERATOR: Next question is Charlie Wolfson from CBS.

QUESTION: Madame Secretary, in the aftermath of the printing of the cartoons of
the Prophet Mohammed, there has been outrage around the world that we've all
seen. The question is: Do you think this is spontaneous as it continues? If
not, who is behind it? What group or what governments might be behind it?

SECRETARY RICE: Well, let me first say that this has been a difficult period.
We are strong proponents of the freedom of the press. It is one of the most
fundamental freedoms of democratic development. We also believe that with press
freedom comes a certain responsibility. And the United States has been a place
where there has been also freedom of religion and that means that people have
to exist in the same body and to respect each other's religious traditions and
respect each other's religious sensibilities and that is also very important.

Now, nothing justifies the violence that has broken out in which many innocent
people have been injured. Nothing justifies the burning of diplomatic
facilities or threats to diplomatic facilities around the world. This is a time
when everyone should urge calm and should urge that there is an atmosphere of
respect and understanding.

I think that there have been a lot of governments that have spoken out about
this. Note, for instance, Afghanistan and Lebanon, very important comments even
by the Ayatollah Sistani about this.

But yes, there are governments that have also used this opportunity to incite
violence. I don't have any doubt that given the control of the Syrian
Government in Syria, given the control of the Iranian Government, which, by the
way, hasn't even hidden its hand in this, that Iran and Syria have gone out of
their way to inflame sentiments and to use this to their own purposes. And the
world ought to call them on it. All responsible people ought to say that there
is no excuse for violence. We all need to respect each other's religions. We
need to respect freedom of the press. But you know, again, with freedom of the
press comes responsibility as well.

QUESTION: Madame Secretary, I'd like to ask you a comment about the fact that
the UN Secretary General expressed his concern yesterday of the targeted
killing in Gaza Strip. There were like nine or ten in the last week. Do you
share his concern?

And Mr. Minister -- Mrs. Minister -- I'm sorry, too used to a male -- Madame
Minister, it seems that it's quite clear that there is an American-Israeli plan
for the time till the Hamas government is formed, but I'm not sure we
understand what is the plan on the day after it. What does Israel and the
United States do? Because sooner or later, there will be a Hamas government in
the territories. Thank you.

SECRETARY RICE: Well, the U.S. position on this issue has not changed. It has
long been our view that there should -- that all actions should be viewed with
a mind to the consequences the day after of any actions. No one denies to
Israel the right to fight terrorism. Israel is a democratic state and has a
right to protect its citizens, just as the United States has a right to protect
its citizens and to fight terrorism. We are hopeful that the fight against
terrorism for the United States as well as for Israel can take place in the
context of a process that recognizes that violence and terrorism are not
permissible in the international community ever. There isn't any excuse for the
wanton taking of life of innocent life.

And so we have spoken out that the way, the context that we need to resolve
these problems, is put forward in the roadmap, that terrorist organizations
would be dismantled, that people will not use terrorist techniques, they will
in fact not just dismantle terrorism but fully renounce terrorism. And in that
context, everybody will be better able to protect their citizens in an
environment in which all responsible states and all responsible groups are
pulling in the same direction.

FOREIGN MINISTER LIVNI: Any future Palestinian government should meet these
precondition or requirements, adopting all the former agreements, recognizing
the right of Israel to exist, renounce terrorism and violence and dismantle
terrorist organization and infrastructure of terror. If this doesn't happen and
the Hamas is going to be the next Palestinian government, the answer is simple.
I mean, the Hamas is a terrorist organization. It is a designated terrorist
organization. And here comes the conclusion. I mean, when an entity, a state,
is being led by terrorists, the meaning is that this entity, this authority,
this state, is going to transfer into a terror state. And the reason meaning
for this kind of recognition and the road and the international community has
their own sanctions and measures when it comes to an entity which transfer into
a terror entity.

SECRETARY RICE: Thank you.

FOREIGN MINISTER LIVNI: Thank you.
2006/159

Released on February 8, 2006

************************************************************
See http://www.state.gov/secretary/ for all remarks by the Secretary of State.
************************************************************

QUESTION: Madame Secretary, in the aftermath of the printing of the cartoons of
the Prophet Mohammed, there has been outrage around the world that we've all
seen. The question is: Do you think this is spontaneous as it continues? If
not, who is behind it? What group or what governments might be behind it?

SECRETARY RICE: Well, let me first say that this has been a difficult period.
We are strong proponents of the freedom of the press. It is one of the most
fundamental freedoms of democratic development. We also believe that with press
freedom comes a certain responsibility. And the United States has been a place
where there has been also freedom of religion and that means that people have
to exist in the same body and to respect each other's religious traditions and
respect each other's religious sensibilities and that is also very important.

Now, nothing justifies the violence that has broken out in which many innocent
people have been injured. Nothing justifies the burning of diplomatic
facilities or threats to diplomatic facilities around the world. This is a time
when everyone should urge calm and should urge that there is an atmosphere of
respect and understanding.

I think that there have been a lot of governments that have spoken out about
this. Note, for instance, Afghanistan and Lebanon, very important comments even
by the Ayatollah Sistani about this.

But yes, there are governments that have also used this opportunity to incite
violence. I don't have any doubt that given the control of the Syrian
Government in Syria, given the control of the Iranian Government, which, by the
way, hasn't even hidden its hand in this, that Iran and Syria have gone out of
their way to inflame sentiments and to use this to their own purposes. And the
world ought to call them on it. All responsible people ought to say that there
is no excuse for violence. We all need to respect each other's religions. We
need to respect freedom of the press. But you know, again, with freedom of the
press comes responsibility as well.

A stone-throwing protester (Paid by Islamist Regime) at the British Embassy in Iran.
President Bush urged governments to help quell the violence sparked by a series of cartoons depicting the Prophet Mohammed -- as Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice began sparring with Syrian over the deadly protests. "Iran and Syria have gone out of their way to inflame sentiments and to use this to their own purposes," Rice said.

BEIRUT, Lebanon (AP) -- The leader of Hezbollah, heading a march by hundreds of thousands of Shiite Muslims Thursday, said President Bush and his secretary of state should "shut up" after they accused Syria and Iran of fueling protests over cartoons of the Prophet Muhammad.

Denmark, meanwhile, said it had temporarily closed its diplomatic mission in Beirut, which was burned by protesters Sunday, and all staff had left Lebanon.

Danes feared religious processions in Muslim countries Thursday to mark the Shiite festival of Ashoura would spill over into violence against its diplomats and soldiers after days of protests over the caricatures, which were first published in a Danish newspaper in September.

About 2,000 hard-line Muslims also rallied and burned a Danish flag Thursday in the Bangladeshi capital of Dhaka.

In Beirut, Hezbollah leader Sheik Hassan Nasrallah urged Muslims worldwide to keep demonstrating until there is an apology over the drawings and Europe passes laws forbidding insults to the prophet.

The head of the guerrilla group, which is backed by Iran and Syria, spoke before a mass Ashoura procession. Whipping up the crowds on the most solemn day for Shiites worldwide, Nasrallah declared:

"Defending the prophet should continue all over the world. Let Condoleezza Rice and Bush and all the tyrants shut up. We are an Islamic nation that cannot tolerate, be silent or be lax when they insult our prophet and sanctities."

"We will uphold the messenger of God not only by our voices but also by our blood," he told the crowds, estimated by organizers at about 700,000. Police had no final estimates but said the figure was likely to be even higher.

Speaking about the controversy for the first time on Wednesday, Bush condemned the deadly rioting sparked by the cartoons and urged foreign leaders to halt the spreading violence. Rice said Iran and Syria "have gone out of their way to inflame sentiments and to use this to their own purposes. And the world ought to call them on it."

Iran has rejected the U.S. accusations. Syria has not commented publicly.

In protests throughout the Muslim world, demonstrators who saw the drawings as deeply insulting to Islam have attacked embassies in Syria, Lebanon and Iran and rioted in Afghanistan. Islam is interpreted to forbid any illustrations of the prophet.

Jyllands-Posten, the Danish paper that first published the drawings, apologized last week for offending Muslims but stood by its decision to print the cartoons, citing freedom of speech.

Other European publications recently reprinted the drawings, which included an image of Muhammad wearing a bomb-shaped with a burning fuse, in a show of solidarity.

Denmark's government has said it could not apologize over a newspaper's publication.

In Brussels, Belgium, Mohamed Ahmed Sherif, chairman of the Libyan-based World Islamic Call Society, said Muslims see the drawings as a direct attack on their values and called the decision to print them in European newspapers a "hate program."

Sherif, speaking during a visit Brussels where he met European Union officials, said the cartoons only serve to fuel extremism.

"Nobody should blame the Muslims if they are unhappy about the images of the Prophet Muhammad," Sherif said. "It's forbidden to create a hate program to show that the prophet is a terrorist while he's not. Don't ask us to try to make people understand that this is not a campaign of hate."

Nasrallah, a black-turbaned, bearded cleric, demanded an apology for the cartoons and laws to prevent a repetition.

"There can be no settlement before an apology and there can be no settlement before laws are legislated by the European Parliament and the parliaments of European countries," he said.

Islamic nations should demand "a law committing the press and the media in the West that proscribes insulting our prophet. If this matter cannot be achieved that means they (West) insist on continuing this," he added.

Nasrallah said that if the controversy touched on Jews or Israel the West would have reacted differently and quickly.

In Denmark, the Danish Broadcasting Corp., or DR, said its journalists in Beirut had been warned to stay away from the Shiite Ashoura ceremonies. "It has become more difficult to be a Danish reporter in the Middle East," Lisbet Knudsen, head of DR's news desk said.

The Bangladeshi protesters - most members of the hard-line group, Islamic Constitution Movement - marched through the streets outside the country's main mosque in downtown Dhaka shouting, "Down with Islam's Enemies!" police said.

In the capital of Indian-controlled Kashmir, about 200 people turned an Islamic procession into a protest against the prophet drawings, shouting "Down with Denmark" and "Down with Israel." Senior Superintendent of Police Muneer Khan said 25 people were arrested as police beat back angry demonstrators.

Malaysia's government Thursday indefinitely shut down a local newspaper for reprinting one of the drawings.

Why Kofi Annan is ignoring Human Rights Voilation In Iran?UN chief Kofi Annan has been ignoring 1000s of letters and petitions regarding massive Human Rights voilation in Iran because he has received expensive Persian carpets as gift from Islamist regime few years ago.
Many FREE Iran Activists think Kofi Annan is the worst UN chief and must resign before creating another mess.

UNITED NATIONS (AFP) - UN chief Kofi Annan said that the Iran nuclear issue, the Prophet Mohammed cartoon row and a UN role in Sudan's troubled Darfur region would top the agenda of his talks in Washington.

The UN secretary general is to meet US President George W. Bush at the White House on Monday.

"We have a lot of issues on the agenda to discuss and I'm looking forward to the meeting," Annan said. "We will of course discuss the Iranian issue, the situation in Iraq, the Middle East... I would not be surprised if the issue of the cartoons comes up."

The secretary general has joined other world leaders in trying to calm worldwide Islamic furor over the publication of caricatures of the Prophet Mohammed.

Islam considers any image of Mohammed to be blasphemous.

Other issues to be taken up include plans to replace the beleaguered African Union force in Darfur with a robust, mobile and better-equipped UN force, UN reforms and the crisis in Ivory Coast, he added.

Annan, who has had an uneasy relationship with Washington since the Iraq war and the corruption scandal over the UN oil-for-food program for Iraq, made it clear that relations were on the mend.

"We have been on the phone quite frequently, and so there has been quite a lot of dialogue going on between the (Bush) administration and myself," he noted. "And I think we're working reasonably well together both with the president and Secretary of State ( Condoleezza Rice)."

Some folks seem to live in a state of denial, and I don't think a few Persian carpets has all that much to do with it...it's hard for folks to change because it means admitting mistake, or simply blindness (concious or not).

Right now, the Iran dossier puts a bright spotlight on the UN, and the effectiveness of multilateral diplomacy, as well as a bright spotlight on the regime's activities.

The other thing that comes to mind with Annan and his position as SG is that in trying to please everyone, he pleases no one. Maybe that's just "occupational hazzard" for a guy who's trying to herd cats of a lot of different stripes.

Q: Good morning, Mr. Secretary-General. We see that you are meeting with the new Israeli Foreign Minister [Tzipi Livni] today, and the Quartet just met in London, which you attended. But yesterday Hamas reiterated that it will not recognize Israel. What's going to be the focus of your discussion with the Minister, and what is your message to the Palestinians?

SG: I think we will discuss the situation on the ground, and the developments since the elections. And of course we have Israeli elections coming up in March. My message to the Palestinian people who voted and voted peacefully, in a calm and secure manner, is to pursue the effort that they have been engaged in with the Quartet in trying to implement the Roadmap. I think it is important for us to understand that the elections only just took place. Hamas won the elections but they have never been in government; they need time to organize themselves. The transitional government will stay in office for another three months, which hopefully will give Hamas time to organize itself for consultations to take place between President [Mahmoud] Abbas and the Hamas group. And there are discussions taking place in the region, in Egypt and in Saudi Arabia and others, with the group. I hope that, in the end, they will heed the Quartet statement urging them to honour all the obligations entered into by the Palestinian Authority, transform themselves into a political party, and accept the two state solution. I hope that eventually that is the direction they will go. They need desperately assistance on the financial and economic front, and we are doing whatever we can to help. Jim Wolfensohn, the Quartet envoy, is very busy talking to governments ensuring that the transitional government has the resources to carry out all its responsibilities.

Q: Even with Hamas' refusal to recognize Israel, you still want the money?

SG: We are at a very early stage of the game. As I said, there is a transitional government in place for three months. We are going to support that government to continue its work. I urge Hamas to listen to the appeals, not just from the Quartet, but from other governments in the region, asking it to transform itself into a political party. We must also understand that this is not the first time that an armed movement has transformed itself into a political party. There are lots of examples around the world. And I urge Hamas to go the same route.

Q: On the subject of the cartoons, now something like 22 countries have shown these cartoons. Do you think that that should be stopped, that they should no longer be shown? And also, do you think, as the U.S. is suggesting, that certain countries are using this issue to stoke rage among…

SG: Let me say that, honestly, I do not understand why any newspaper will publish the cartoons today. It is insensitive, it is offensive, it is provocative, and they should see what has happened around the world. This does not mean that I am against freedom of speech, or freedom of the press. Yes, I am for that, but as I have indicated in the past, freedom of speech is not a license. It does entail exercising responsibility and judgment, and quite honestly I cannot understand why any editor will publish cartoons at this time which inflames, and pours oil on the fire.

As to the question of whether some governments are manipulating this, it's difficult for me to say. I have no evidence to that effect. This is so widespread, and it is unfortunate that we all need to take steps to calm the situation and whatever the anger of those concerned, violence is not the answer. They should not attack innocent civilians. They should not attack people who are not responsible for the publication of the cartoons. Whether it is a general condemnation of Denmark, or Europeans, it is wrong. They should really avoid doing that and violence must be condemned as unacceptable.

Q: Mr. Secretary-General, the issue has sort of come to the UN in the sense that the Organization of the Islamic Conference has proposed three paragraphs to amend the draft resolution on the Human Rights Council. Have you seen that? And what do you think about what they embody, although they don't mention the cartoons? And what about the idea of bringing a divisive issue like that into the mix of a debate that is already, sort of, toxic?

SG: Let me start by saying that we issued a statement. I worked with the Secretary General of the Islamic Conference, with the European [Union High] Representative [Javier] Solana, and we came up with a joint statement which I think speaks for the vast majority of states. And the ambassadors of the OIC here at the UN have also issued a statement which also came out yesterday, and I met with them yesterday, and I don't think they are in a confrontational mood at all. In fact they are responsible, and behaving responsibly, and working like all of us to calm the situation. The statement that they introduced in the discussion in the human rights debate is not inflammatory, it is not against blasphemy, it is a statement that would try and underline the need for respect for all religions. So I don't think it is something that goes counter to the spirit of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, or even freedom of the press. And so let's wait and see the final statement that comes out. Obviously they, like me, would want to see the Human Rights Council established as soon as possible. I would want to see it done by the end of this month, so that when, next month, the human rights community comes together in Geneva, they will be meeting under the umbrella of the new Council. It is possible. We can do it, and I urge all the Member States to buckle down and get it done. And in fact, the uproar that we are all discussing here also underscores the importance of respect for the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, and the rights, both freedom of expression and respect for religious rights.

Q: When you called for Human Rights Council reform last year, you indicated you wanted a radical change. When you look at the document that has been produced, do you see that as kind of transformation, radical reform, that you envisioned at the beginning?

SG: Let me say that negotiations are still going on. It is not over yet. It hasn't moved as fast as I would have liked. It may not be as radical as I would have liked, but I think you will see considerable changes and differences in the Council once it has been established to justify the changes that we have gone through. I don't think we should come to conclusions. Give it another week or so. The discussions are still going on. It is intense. It is frustrating, but I think at the end we will get a Council that we can all live with. It may not be everything we wanted, but I would expect it to be better than what we have today.

Q: Sir, on the issue of the cartoons again, could it be that the silver lining of the issue is that it has actually engaged a worldwide discussion of what freedom of expression should be, and what the parameters ought to be?

And on Hamas, Hamas has obviously won the Palestinian elections. The Islamic Brotherhood made big gains in Egypt. Religious parties won in Iraq. What do you read in that for the region, and for the world at large?

SG: Let me start with your second question. I think, when you organize democratic elections, you can never anticipate the results, and you never know who wins or who emerges. I think the results you referred to, whether in Egypt or Hamas, indicate that the Islamic groups have been well organized. They have been able to organize themselves. You take the case of Palestine; Hamas has had a record of offering social services. They have had a record of being organized and disciplined, and of not being corrupt. What were the people voting for? Were they voting for a clean government? Were they voting for peace? Were they voting for a stable environment in which their kids could go to school? Or were they voting for a Hamas manifesto? My sense is that they were voting for a peaceful and stable and well-organized Palestine. So it is a lesson and a message for all rulers and politicians in the region, and everywhere in the world, that people want good government, and they will vote for people that they believe would offer that. Obviously, the question of organization and grass roots contacts also have played a role here.

On the question of freedom of expression, I think the question is not even redefining the freedom of expression as we know it, as inscribed in the Universal Declaration. I often say it is a bit like religion. If there is a problem, it is not with the faith, but the faithful. It is not the text, it is the way we interpret it. I think it is also significant to recognize that many major newspapers, many responsible editors around the world did not publish the cartoons. And so, we should not use the behaviour of a minority of papers or editors to condemn the entire media and the press.

Q: With the victories of Hamas, the gains of the Muslim Brotherhood and religious parties in Iraq - do you think that at the end of the day, the region is kissing goodbye to secular government?

SG: I am not sure if the region is saying goodbye to secular government, or if the religious are better organized, and have acquired a reputation of being able to deliver. If that is the case, it is a message for ruling regimes, and for other parties, that this is what people are looking for. I am not ready to accept that it is a total rejection of secular movements and a total swing to Islamic parties. I think, if the regimes in power were seen to be delivering, were seen to be close to the people, I am sure the results would have been quite different.

Q: Mr. Secretary-General. Do you see a role for yourself now that Iran has been reported to the Security Council? What role could you play, and could this be an issue that could help define the last year of your term as Secretary-General?

SG: On the Iranian issue, the [International] Atomic [Energy] Agency is preparing a report for the end of the month. What is important is that both sides have said negotiations are not dead, negotiations are not over, and they are prepared to talk, and I would urge them to continue. In the meantime it would be important that no steps are taken that would escalate the already tense situation. And I hope Iran will continue to freeze its activities, the way they are now, to allow talks to go forward, to allow them to pursue the Russian offer, and to allow negotiations with the European Three and the Russians to come back to the table. Obviously if the issue were to be referred here to the Council, I would work with the Member States to find the best way to deal with it.

Q: You are going to Washington on Monday, the first time in two years. Is there a sense of the SG who came back in from the cold after [inaudible]. What is going to be at the top of your list for discussions?

SG: Let me say that, this is not my first trip to Washington in two years. Even though I haven't been to the White House, you should recall that the President has been here, and we have met in other fora, and we have been on the phone quite frequently, and so there has been quite a lot of dialogue going on between the Administration and myself. And I think we are working reasonably well together, both with the President and the Secretary of State [Condoleezza Rice]. I think, on my trip we will of course discuss the Iranian issue, the situation in Iraq, the Middle East. I would not be surprised if the issue of the cartoons comes up. And of course, we have the crucial issue of transformation of the Darfur operation, as well as Côte d'Ivoire, and I hope the reform that is taking place here. So we have a lot of issues on the agenda to discuss, and I am looking forward to the meeting.

Q: A Sudan question: What will the UN peacekeepers, what would they be able to do, aside from regularizing the financing, what would they be able to accomplish that the AU has not? And what lessons should we draw from the failure of the AU forces?

SG: Let me say that the African Union forces did really courageous and noble work. They didn't have the large numbers that would have been required for a region the size of Darfur. They didn't have logistical support. They didn't have the mobility, either on the ground or in the air, that you would need to cover an area of that kind. If the Council asks us to move in, and we are doing contingency planning, we would expect to go in with a completely different force, and have a completely different concept of operation. I would want to see a highly mobile force on the ground in Darfur. A force that would be able to crisscross the territory in APCs and jeeps, and would also have tactical air assets to be able to be on the ground when there is an SOS – not to arrive after the harm has been done - and to be able to send a message to the militia and the people causing the damage that we have a force that is capable to respond, a force that is everywhere, and a force that will be there on time to prevent them from intimidating and killing the innocent civilians. But such a force would require the participation of governments with highly trained troops who are also well equipped. It is not going to be easy for the big and powerful countries with armies to delegate to third world countries. They will have to play a part if we are going to stop the carnage that we see in Darfur.

Q: Will you be asking them for troops?

SG: They will have to commit troops and equipment. Or if they don't want to do it, help us find the troops and equipment to be able to undertake the mandate they give us.

Q: There is some concern that, were Western countries to send troops to Darfur, you may end up with another Holy War in an Islamic country.

SG: I know that that has been a concern, and some people in Sudan have raised that possibility. But I think this is where we need to work with the government, and the African Union needs to work with us to convince the government that they are coming in to help contain the situation, but they are not coming in as an invading or a fighting force. Already, with the African Union forces, we do have experts and troops from outside the region, who are offering technical advice to the African Union forces, with the consent of the Sudanese government. I do not think it is impossible to get them to agree to allow a UN force, which contains troops from outside Africa, to come to Darfur. And so, I am very optimistic.

Q: Will you ask President Bush for a commitment?

SG: I will discuss it with him. I will take it.

Q: Will you ask him, will you specifically say “President Bush, I want you to send troops. I want you to commit equipment.”?

SG: I will share with him the facts that I have shared with you, the needs that we have, and the countries that I think can supply those needs, and that will include the U.S. Thank you.

Some folks seem to live in a state of denial, and I don't think a few Persian carpets has all that much to do with it...it's hard for folks to change because it means admitting mistake, or simply blindness (concious or not).

Right now, the Iran dossier puts a bright spotlight on the UN, and the effectiveness of multilateral diplomacy, as well as a bright spotlight on the regime's activities.

The other thing that comes to mind with Annan and his position as SG is that in trying to please everyone, he pleases no one. Maybe that's just "occupational hazzard" for a guy who's trying to herd cats of a lot of different stripes.

We'll see what Monday brings.

Best,

Oppie

Quote:

The other thing that comes to mind with Annan and his position as SG is that in trying to please everyone, he pleases no one. Maybe that's just "occupational hazzard" for a guy who's trying to herd cats of a lot of different stripes.

No, I don't agree when it comes to clear violation of Human Rights UN Charter by Islamist regime the UN SG should not please any governments except the victims that in most cases they have been tortured to death. Annan didn't do much for Human Rights violation in Iran ....
Human Rights UN Charter should not become a bloody useless game ....

6 Brave Daughters of IRAN Biography As Part of Million Victims of Islamist Regime in Past 27 Years

I happen to agree with you that the sort of compromising position he takes, compromises the UN charter and Universal declaration of Human rights by not specificly addressing not just the IRI's abysmal record, but other's as well.

I said what I said about him pleasing no one, simply because I too am trying to figure out why this world leader cannot seem to stand on principal with both feet.

And I mean that in the broadest possible sense...on a number of issues besides human rights.

I think the question put to him regarding Iran and Annan's legacy as SG was very telling regarding these issues in his answer.

This is why I said some are living in a state of denial....since when has the IRI "frozen" anything....while it continues in secret?

Or while condemnation has been made in the general assembly of the Human rights record...and the abuse continues?

This guy wants to try and lead the world community of nations with a blindfold on, a gag in his mouth, and cotton in his ears or what I wonder?

That is the effect of compromise of principles seen on the international org. he leads.

I said we'll see Monday, because it's about time he got some strait talk, from someone willing to take off the blindfold, remove the gag, and the cotton ....and enlighten his state of mind.

I said we'll see Monday, because it's about time he got some strait talk, from someone willing to take off the blindfold, remove the gag, and the cotton ....and enlighten his state of mind.

Dear Oppenheimer,
I am sorry you will be disappointed again. I don't know how Anann can look at himself in the mirror, his record as UN SG is total failure and disgusting he must be ashamed of himself. It is time to give him Human Rights Nobel Prize.
Thanks
Cyrus

Aye Cyrus, but I'm an optimist remember?.....chuckle...do you suppose he should share that ig-Noble award with Antar?.....or maybe not...monkey boy's ego is puffing out of his stuffed shirt as it is....

But seriously, Who would you think should be the next UN secretary general?....I believe he/she will be elected this summer...6 months prior to taking office (for job familiarization and continuity purposes).

But seriously, Who would you think should be the next UN secretary general?....I believe he/she will be elected this summer...6 months prior to taking office (for job familiarization and continuity purposes).

Regards,

Oppie

After Koffi Annan as UN secretary general, Antar or Khameni are becoming most qualified candidates to put an end to Human Rights UN Charter and replace it with the UN Charter for how to rape 9 year old virgin girl before execution.

Under Antar or Khameni as UN secretary general Human Rights UN Charter Will Be Replaced to benefit all UN Member countries:Some articles of the laws of the Islamic Republic For UN Charter to please Islamists not to Riot

From The Islamic Constitution Without Any Changes:

Article 2
Foundation of legislation is God, Source of laws is Quran, and life style is that of the prophet (Mohammad) and his family, meaning Imam traditions, Guardian Juriscouncil “Velaayat Faghih” – Khamenei_ is the illustrator of the laws.

Article 4
All legislatures must be within the standards of Islam by approval of Imam and the Guardian Council (appointed by imam).

Article 12
The official religion is Islam and faith in the twelve imams and this principle is never changeable. Penalty for changing this is execution.

Article 13
Only followers of three other religions are recognized as minorities (who do not have equal rights with the Muslims believing in twelve imams). The rest are infidels and deprived from all civil rights and killing them is indisputable.

The Islamic Penal Code

Article 207
A Muslim who has killed a non-Muslim has impunity unless only subject to paying fines.

Article 222
A sane person who has killed an insane person has impunity.

Article 220
A father or grand father who kills his child or grand child has impunity. (But, a five-year-old child, who kills some one, is punishable – page 152 ….)

Article 201
A thief, the first time must get his/her four fingers of the right hand cut. The second time, he/she must get his left feet cut from below the tarsus. The third time he must be convicted to imprisonment, and fourth time, even if he steals in the prison, his conviction must be execution.

Article 186
Followers of a group who take armed action against the God’s government (the Tehran regime), even if not involved in the military branch, are considered combatant with God and corrupt on the earth and their punishment is execution.

Article 630
A man, who notices his wife in intercourse with another man, can concurrently kill both of them.

Article 210
A military infidel who intentionally kills another military infidel is not punishable.

The above Constitution is in sharp contrast with the international laws and particularly the Human Rights Charter. Koffi Annan as UN secretary general must be ashamed of himself for allowing an Islamist regime with above Constitution to be a member of UN.

Last edited by cyrus on Thu Feb 09, 2006 11:24 pm; edited 2 times in total

Well in that case, I guess they'd have to move the UN to Qom, because New York is filled with infidels.....LOL!

.....

Don't forget Najaf in Iraq and Mecca.

Oppenheimer wrote:

I was however asking a serious question who you might think would be a proper candidate to uphold the UN charter and its tenets of human rights, democracy, and a better world.

That is if anyone comes to mind .....

With Koffi Annan mess as UN secretary general it is very difficult to be serious about UN.
In response to your serious hard question , my first wish list are as follow:
- Someone who has been Victim of Terror or Torture with international law degree and very experienced in resolving complex problems with optimal result.
- High degree of integrity ....
- Solid record as Human Rights Activists or Judge … Family members of Sept 11 victim might be a good candidate ....
- Strong believe in Free Society and Secular Democracy
- With Annan’s mess we don’t want another politician to run UN.